BS within 20k, my auditions, my dilemma

[filmguy]

a bit of background -

along with the decision as to which model of denon avr i should buy as i laid out in this thread

http://www.hifivision.com/surround-amplifiers-receivers/64667-dts-x-atmos-5-1-2-room-eq-worth.html

i also have to make a decision about my speaker setup

currently it is
fronts - wharfedale diamond 8.2
rears - wharfedale diamond 9.0
sub - klipsch 12"

i have a few options which i am listing in ascending order of cost & complexity

1) if i opt for the denon 520 which is 5.1 i can continue with the same setup


2) if i opt for the denon 1200 which is 5.1.2

2a) i can continue with the same setup with the option of biwiring the fronts to the avr's 2 extra unused channel outputs which should reduce the strain on the avr esp since WDs are relatively inefficient speakers (86db @6ohms iirc)

2b) i can buy another pair of WD 9.0s or similar to use as the atmos speakers

2c) i can buy another pair of fronts & use the WD 8.2s as rears (bit of overkill imo, but what the hey) & the current 9.0s as atmos speakers


now if i go for this last option i think i would like to go for speakers that offer a different sound signature. with my last setup with marantz avr i found the setup too warm at times esp for movies & pop/r&b kinda music (though very good for instrumental music, vocals, classical, rock)

so i have auditioned a few BS (max budget - 20k) if i decide to go down that route

so far i have auditioned the following listening to diff genres of music & just a bit of movies (even though my eventual usage will be movies 75 music 25 but i think music gives you better idea of speakers sound sig) -


A) wharfedale diamond 225
very good. seems to have a very flat response across the spectrum ie faithful reproduction of sound without overemphasizing anything. but again on the warmer side. without a direct A/B comparison i'm not sure about much difference between them & 8.2s. they probably have more bass but since i have a sub that wont help me too much.


B) polk tsx220
too sharp. overemphasized treble. will be fatiguing


C) polk rti a3
this is about 7k-8k more than the a1s but the profx dealer didnt have the a1s which is in my budget on demo but assured me the sound signature would be the same.

treble is not overemphasized like the tsx, immediate response is "these are real fun speakers". now i know what they say when they mean "forward speakers" they were a lot more dynamic than the previous 2 speakers. but on critical listening i realised that the lows & highs are more emphasized than the mids ie the bass & treble seem more clearer than the vocals. not that vocals were unclear, mind. i could immediately make out that these would be great for movies which they were. also very very good for pop/hip hop; with other genres i think the WDs might be a better bet. this is the kind of speakers you want at a party.



D) heard some paradigm towers (not sure of model but dealer didnt have any BS for demo so just to get a sense of the sound sig)
found it too sharp



will be trying to demo BA26 also. i've been told that it'll be similar to the polk sound

the dali zensor 1 is highly rated & within the 20k budget but dont know where i can audition them in mumbai


if i do go the route of option 2c from above & if this was my first pair of speakers i'd probably have gone for the WD 220 but i am now leaning towards the rti a1s atm since it will probably be more punchy & oomphier than my current setup. only thing holding me back is the recessed mids which may not be as good for the indie rock kinda music that i also listen to

it seems that most speakers (at least in this budget range) are either like t20 players (ie flashy, dynamic; usually the american brands like polk etc) or like test players (proper, technically correct but can be staid; european brands like wharfedale etc ). arent there any Virat kind of speakers ie equally good in all formats?

what do you guys think?

 

[Audiodoc]

Elac b5 b6 series by Andrew jones.

 

[elangoas]

it seems that most speakers (at least in this budget range) are either like t20 players (ie flashy, dynamic; usually the american brands like polk etc) or like test players (proper, technically correct but can be staid; european brands like wharfedale etc ). arent there any Virat kind of speakers ie equally good in all formats?

hyeah:hyeah: That was good one.. What is your center speaker (or) did i miss it?

I had used the WD 9.2 with a Marantz AVR.. AVR had to be pumped to 80% of the volume to get anything solid from the speaker..

 

[efernand1]

Hi

I think you will be better off with a Marantz AVR.....get a 7.1 model so you can use the same to your advantage and Bi Amp the fronts.

Polk RTiA1s are being used by FM "Celester340" on a Denon 520BT. He is quite happy with the performance...he did own TSX440s in the past and once he switched to the RTiA1s, it became a different ball game for him.

These speakers definite sound better on a Marantz and all Marantz models besides audyssey calibration, have manual adjustable EQ, Bass + Treble where you can tweak to your requirements / expectations....most bookshelf speakers would sound great

Apparently, Taga Harmony Platinum B40s seem to be great in performance....why not try to audition those too?

 

[filmguy]

hyeah:hyeah: That was good one.. What is your center speaker (or) did i miss it?

I had used the WD 9.2 with a Marantz AVR.. AVR had to be pumped to 80% of the volume to get anything solid from the speaker..

thanks

have no center. phantom center. dont miss center so much. plus get more vfm from my fronts then

yeah even my marantz had to be pushed to drive. European speakers seem to be more difficult to drive.

Hi

I think you will be better off with a Marantz AVR.....get a 7.1 model so you can use the same to your advantage and Bi Amp the fronts.

Polk RTiA1s are being used by FM "Celester340" on a Denon 520BT. He is quite happy with the performance...he did own TSX440s in the past and once he switched to the RTiA1s, it became a different ball game for him.

These speakers definite sound better on a Marantz and all Marantz models besides audyssey calibration, have manual adjustable EQ, Bass + Treble where you can tweak to your requirements / expectations....most bookshelf speakers would sound great

Apparently, Taga Harmony Platinum B40s seem to be great in performance....why not try to audition those too?

hi

the marantz would be about 5-6k more than denon 1200 which is already much more than i would've liked to have spent

taga reviews are very limited. any idea where i can audition them?

 

[efernand1]

Hi

I believe Avenue Sound is selling Taga as per their website, check with them.

Although Denon and Marantz are made by D & M holdings, the difference is the built quality and performance and hence the cost difference.

The NR series performance is almost equal to Denon's x1200 from an power output perspective....

There are a couple of Marantz AVRs available on Hifiads.com which are possibly a couple of months old and available if you are open to pre owned..no harm in checking those options if there are budget challenges......

 

[elangoas]

have no center. phantom center. dont miss center so much. plus get more vfm from my fronts then

Movies have most information in the center channel.. I think it is better you retain your speakers as is and try to source a WD 9/10 center channel speakers as it would fairly match WD speakers that you have..

If you want to go 5.1.2 way, you can look for smaller speakers probably used ones from wharfedale's itself..

 

[MaSh]

thanks

have no center. phantom center. dont miss center so much. plus get more vfm from my fronts then

the marantz would be about 5-6k more than denon 1200 which is already much more than i would've liked to have spent

I too prefer No Center speaker, even though I have one. However, you would feel a difference only when the room shape is not ideal, i.e., L shape or something like that.

Denonx1200 is a very capable receiver. If that is on your radar, go for it. For speakers, you can look at Q Acoustics 3020/Concept 20 too.

Movies have most information in the center channel.. I think it is better you retain your speakers as is and try to source a WD 9/10 center channel speakers as it would fairly match WD speakers that you have..

On the contrary, with no Center, the receiver sends the Center signals to the front speakers giving the vocals a larger stage. However, for this to work perfectly, the amp and speakers should have perfect imaging, centering along with a rectangle room with listeners sitting close to ideal locations. Give it a shot and try it. After extensive A B tests I have turned off my Center speaker and switch it on only when I have a movie night with friends filled in the room.

MaSh

 

[elangoas]

On the contrary, with no Center, the receiver sends the Center signals to the front speakers giving the vocals a larger stage. However, for this to work perfectly, the amp and speakers should have perfect imaging, centering along with a rectangle room with listeners sitting close to ideal locations. Give it a shot and try it. After extensive A B tests I have turned off my Center speaker and switch it on only when I have a movie night with friends filled in the room. MaSh

Never tried that though.. Will do..

 

[filmguy]

I too prefer No Center speaker, even though I have one. However, you would feel a difference only when the room shape is not ideal, i.e., L shape or something like that.

Denonx1200 is a very capable receiver. If that is on your radar, go for it. For speakers, you can look at Q Acoustics 3020/Concept 20 too.




On the contrary, with no Center, the receiver sends the Center signals to the front speakers giving the vocals a larger stage. However, for this to work perfectly, the amp and speakers should have perfect imaging, centering along with a rectangle room with listeners sitting close to ideal locations. Give it a shot and try it. After extensive A B tests I have turned off my Center speaker and switch it on only when I have a movie night with friends filled in the room.

MaSh

q acoustics 3020 is 28+ afaik

Never tried that though.. Will do..

you should give it a try

there are plenty of articles out there that talk of how a phantom center is in many ways better than a dedicated speaker. plus if i'm not wrong isnt that how it's in the cinema setups..

i demo'd center when i bought my current setup. my seating is pretty much in center of the 2 fronts so i didnt think i needed it. plus this way i get more vfm coz in most english movies (drama/comedy types) there's very little in the speakers other than center channel, so this way i'm putting my fronts to work in all movies

 

[Lad1]

thanks

have no center. phantom center. dont miss center so much. plus get more vfm from my fronts then

yeah even my marantz had to be pushed to drive. European speakers seem to be more difficult to drive.



hi

the marantz would be about 5-6k more than denon 1200 which is already much more than i would've liked to have spent

taga reviews are very limited. any idea where i can audition them?

Mz Audio...